M.O.T.O

Duration

General approach/description of the project

M.O.T.O focused on fostering transferability of units of learning outcomes in order to facilitate the professional and geographical mobility of workers in the tourism and catering sector.

To this end, the main objective of M.O.T.O was to provide concrete methodological tools to analyse and describe a range of vocational qualification in terms of units of learning outcomes with reference to selected occupational sectors and to set up a model that will permit the validation, recognition, accumulation and transfer of units of learning outcomes with reference to the existing European tools such as EQF, Europass and ECTS.

Tourism and catering had been identified as the selected occupational areas to test the transferability of units of learning outcomes approach for several reasons:

They are key economic sectors in all partners countries;

They are sectors characterised by similar working processes in spite of local and national specificities; and

They provide job opportunities to many workers who do not have formal qualifications.

Tools, methodology and model developed by M.O.T.O are to be tested through a mobility period. Two trans-national mobility projects will be carried out: the first one between Italy and Austria (tourism) and the second one between Iceland and Finland (catering).

Transfer And Accumulation

A mobility period from three to four weeks, concerning three students from each partner’s country.

The mobility period will be a work experience programme, covering two selected sub-units, common to the qualifications of both the ‘home’ and ‘hosting’ institutions.

The assessment of mobile learners was organised as following:

The ‘hosting’ institution was in charge of the assessment consisting of two phases: an initial evaluation taking place in the middle of the mobility period to support the learning process of the participant. The mobile learner was also assessed at the end of the mobility period to test his/her command of the content of each sub-unit. In addition, an overall assessment took place during the internship.

The assessment was based on an observation grid to be used by the company’s tutor. The main aim of the observation grid was to evaluate the autonomy of the mobile learner in the completion of the two sub-units.

The validation of learning outcomes went as following:

The ‘host’ institution was responsible for confirming that the assessed learning outcomes achieved during the mobility period and/or competences developed by the mobile learners correspond to specific learning outcomes that are required for the national qualification.

Official recognition of achieved learning outcome was in the responsibility of the relevant competent authorities in the country of the ‘home’ institution.

Units of learning outcomes

The approach developed by M.O.T.O to identify common parts/elements of the different national qualifications is based on the analysis of the occupational tasks. These common parts form basis of units of learning outcomes that will be open to mobility.

To pursue such analysis, M.O.T.O adopted the following methodology:

A questionnaire was circulated among the partners to identify and analyse how they usually describe their vocational qualifications in their respective country (what information is contained);

Policies and trends on credit transfer and recognition in project partners countries were analysed;

Qualifications in the areas covered by M.O.T.O (i.e. tourist hospitality and catering – EQF level 3) were mapped and analysed;

To this purpose, a grid to analyse the national qualifications in a consistent manner was designed: the analysis grid aims at identifying the core activities on which qualifications are articulated.

The completed analysis grid served two main objectives:

To identify and select common units of learning outcomes that will be open to mobility: The analysis of the qualifications according to the common grid showed that the qualifications in the partners’ countries could be defined using units of learning outcomes. However, the analysis also illustrated that the learning programmes were not always organised on the basis of units of learning outcomes and/or according to a modularised approach. Therefore, it was challenging to focus on one or two specific units when the mobility period would de facto cover a wide range of transversal activities, corresponding to various units of learning outcomes; and

To define common processes of validation, recognition and accumulation for the selected common units.

The mobility period was organised as follow:

A mobility period from three to four weeks, concerning two-three students from each partner’s country.

The mobility period will be a work experience programme, covering two selected sub-units, common to the qualifications of both the ‘home’ and ‘hosting’ institutions.

The assessment of mobile learners went as following:

The ‘hosting’ institution was in charge of the assessment that will consist of two phases: an initial evaluation will take place in the middle of the mobility period to support the learning process of the participant. The mobile learner will also be assessed at the end of the mobility period to test his/her command of the content of each sub-unit. In addition, an overall assessment will take place during the internship.

The assessment was based on an observation grid to be used by the company’s tutor. The main aim of the observation grid was to evaluate the autonomy of the mobile learner in the completion of the two sub-units.

The validation of learning outcomes went as following:

The ‘host’ institution was responsible for confirming that the assessed learning outcomes achieved during the mobility period and/or competences developed by the mobile learners correspond to specific learning outcomes that are required for the national qualification.

Official recognition of achieved learning outcome was in the responsibility of the relevant competent authorities in the country of the ‘home’ institution.

ECVET Points

In the framework of M.O.T.O and as set out in the ECVET recommendation, the allocation of ECVET points to units of learning outcomes is the responsibility of the ‘home’ institution. This allocation is decided according to the weight attributed to the unit within the national qualification.

The ‘home’ institution does not consult the ‘hosting’ institution: transparency and reciprocity among the two institutions is ensured beforehand through the learning agreement and the Memorandum of Understanding.

Consolidation of partnerships in formal agreements

Identifying the competent institutions who would sign the Memorandum of Understanding has been widely discussed among the M.O.T.O partners. Two main issues have been raised:

Difficulty to define who is the competent institution, as competencies are distributed among the national and regional levels; and

Difficulty in obtaining support at Ministry level during the piloting phase (i.e. only few students concerned by the mobility scheme and production of testing tools).

M.O.T.O elaborated a proposal of guidelines for the definition of the Learning Agreement and a Learning Agreement as well as Memorandum of Understanding.